Latest / Reformed Thinking / Faith | Jonathan Edwards

Transcript

Faith | Jonathan Edwards · Reformed Thinking

0:00
Welcome to Reform Thinking. I'm your host, and today we're
0:03
taking a deep dive into a concept that, well, I think most
0:08
people assume is totally binary, but it's actually probably the
0:12
most misdiagnosed condition in existence.
0:15
And that is what it actually means to believe.
0:18
You know, usually when we talk about a medical diagnosis,
0:21
there's this expectation of absolute precision, right?
0:24
It feels clean. It feels comforting, like you
0:26
break your arm. The X-ray shows that jagged
0:28
white line and the doctor just points to the screen.
0:31
Yeah, there's the break. Yeah, you have a broken arm.
0:33
We like things to be visible, categorized, and mathematically
0:37
certain, and I think we want our spiritual health to be just as
0:40
measurable as a broken bone. But the issue comes up when you
0:43
step into the landscape of the human soul.
0:46
Suddenly that X-ray machine is, well, it's broken, and we are
0:52
looking at a diagnostic picture that is entirely murky.
0:54
People assume that because they possess a specific set of facts
0:58
in their heads, like because they can pass a theology quiz,
1:01
that they've passed the ultimate test.
1:03
Right, they check the boxes. Yeah, they look at their own
1:05
internal data, they see the historical facts of Christianity
1:09
lined up neatly, and they conclude the soul is in perfect
1:12
health. Which sets the stage for our
1:15
mission today. We have this massive stack of
1:17
source material from the 18th century.
1:20
We're looking into extensive personal writings, notes, and a
1:23
major sermon delivered in July 1750 by Jonathan Edwards that's
1:27
about the. July 1750 sermon.
1:29
Yeah, that's a huge one it. Really is, and the entire focus
1:32
of this material is the nature of faith.
1:35
We're moving way past simple dictionary definitions to
1:38
investigate the core mechanics of what Edwards calls saving
1:42
faith. And we're contrasting that with
1:44
simple intellectual agreement. And I want to speak directly to
1:47
you, the listener right now. It is so easy to accumulate
1:51
theological data in our heads. You know, we read the books, we
1:54
listen to the discussions, we learn the vocabulary.
1:56
It's almost too easy, honestly. It is, but accumulating data
1:59
without it taking hold of our affections is a It's a dangerous
2:03
place to be. We can trick ourselves into
2:05
thinking we possess the reality of a thing just because we can
2:08
define the word. Yeah, totally.
2:10
Today, we want to clarify what genuine living belief looks like
2:14
in action. We want to clear the fog.
2:17
So let's look at where Edwards begins his diagnosis.
2:23
Well, he begins by clearing the ground.
2:24
Like before he builds his actual definition of faith, he spends a
2:28
massive amount of time defining what faith is not.
2:31
Which is helpful. Oh, very.
2:33
His primary target is the assumption that faith is just
2:36
nodding your head at a set of true statements.
2:38
He refers to this as ascent. Ascent.
2:40
Got it. Right ascent is when your
2:42
intellect reviews a proposition, calculates the evidence, and
2:45
says yes, that is factually correct.
2:48
Kind of like agreeing that the capital of France is Paris,
2:50
yeah. Precisely.
2:51
You hear the fact, your brain processes it and you just nod.
2:55
There is 0 resistance to the fact because the evidence is
2:57
totally clear. Right.
2:58
And Edwards argues that intellectual ascent is a
3:01
required component opponent of faith, like you can't believe
3:04
something if you don't first understand it and agree it's
3:06
true. That makes logical sense.
3:08
But he states unequivocally that intellectual ascent falls vastly
3:12
short of saving faith, and to prove this he references the
3:16
book of James, specifically The Faith of Devils.
3:19
Oh man, that is always a striking phrase.
3:22
James writes that the devils believe there is one God and
3:24
they tremble. Yeah, and Edwards leverages that
3:27
verse masterfully. I mean, think about the
3:29
theological knowledge of demons. They have 0 doubts about the
3:33
existence of God. None at all.
3:35
Right. They've seen the spiritual
3:36
realm. They know the facts of the
3:38
gospel are historically and objectively true.
3:40
They know Jesus is the Son of God.
3:42
I mean, in the gospels they confess him as such the second
3:46
they encounter him. Right, they yell it out.
3:47
Yeah, so their intellectual ascent is likely much stronger
3:51
and more accurate accurate than any human beings, yet they are
3:54
completely devoid of saving faith.
3:56
That is a terrifying thought. It really is.
3:59
It means you can score 100% on a theology exam, possess absolute
4:03
certainty with the historical resurrection of Jesus, have 0
4:06
doubts about the Trinity, and still be in the exact same
4:10
spiritual category as a demon. Yeah, that chilling reality is
4:13
what Edwards wants his audience to face.
4:16
If your belief is restricted to the realm of pure intellect, it
4:19
is the faith of devils. So Edwards introduces a phrase
4:23
that becomes central to his entire theology.
4:26
He says true faith involves a quote, spiritual taste and
4:30
relish of what is excellent and divine.
4:32
The spiritual taste and relish that moves the concept
4:35
completely out of the brain and into the senses.
4:37
Right. It moves it to the affections.
4:39
The soul must actively close with the truth.
4:43
Edwards writes that believers receive the truth in the love of
4:46
it. The love of it.
4:47
Yeah, it's not just looking at a fact under a microscope, it's
4:51
tasting it and finding it sweet. OK, I want to try an analogy to
4:54
make this concrete. Let's hear it.
4:55
So imagine you were reading a restaurant review for a place
4:58
that just opened downtown. The critic is raving about the
5:01
chef's signature dish. They describe the ingredients,
5:05
the cooking technique, the presentation.
5:07
Sounds good so far. Right, so you read the article,
5:10
you verify the credentials of the critic, and you conclude,
5:14
yes, this food must be incredibly good.
5:17
You have no doubts about the quality of the restaurant.
5:20
That is a scent. You are nodding your head at the
5:23
facts. But you are still starving,
5:25
though the ascent does nothing for your physical condition.
5:28
Spot on. Now compare that to actually
5:31
walking into the restaurant, sitting down, taking a bite of
5:33
that signature dish, tasting the flavors, and thoroughly enjoying
5:37
the meal yourself. You are experiencing the
5:39
goodness of the food. You are relishing it.
5:42
That is consent. That is the spiritual taste
5:44
Edwards is talking about. And taking that back to the
5:47
demons, the demons read the review and know the chef is a
5:50
master, but they hate the chef and they despise the food.
5:54
Oh, that's a great way to put it.
5:56
Right. They have the facts without the
5:57
relish, Edwards argues. True faith is a belief of the
6:01
truth arising from a sense of the glory and Excellency of God.
6:05
The mind yields to the gospel because it sees the beauty of
6:09
it. This shifts the modern
6:11
understanding of belief entirely, doesn't it?
6:13
Oh. Massively.
6:14
We often treat belief as a cold mathematical calculation.
6:19
You know you weigh the evidence for and against.
6:21
And if the scale tips 51% in favor of Christianity,
6:24
congratulations, you are a believer.
6:26
Yeah, like it's just a probability equation.
6:29
But Edwards is saying, if the heart does not yield to the
6:32
gospel, if it does not receive the truth in the love of it, it
6:36
is not faith at all. It is a massive departure from
6:39
treating religion as an academic exercise, Edwards points out.
6:43
Human beings are not just brains on sticks.
6:45
We are driven by our loves, our desires and our affections.
6:48
Right. What we actually want, yeah.
6:50
If a person views the mechanics of salvation as factually true,
6:54
but finds the idea of bowing to a sovereign God distasteful or
6:57
offensive, their intellectual agreement is useless.
7:00
The heart must consent to the goodness being offered.
7:03
OK, so if faith is more than just nodding your head, what are
7:07
its active mechanics like? How does the mind actually
7:09
relish the truth? That's the big question.
7:11
Right. We are moving from the
7:12
inadequacy of ascent to the actual anatomy of trust, and
7:16
Edwards uses a specific word here.
7:18
I want us to break down acquiescing.
7:20
Yeah, acquiescing. He gives what he considers his
7:24
most complete definition of faith using that word he writes
7:27
quote, faith is the souls entirely embracing the
7:31
revelation of Jesus Christ as our Savior.
7:33
OK. And then he expands on that by
7:35
saying it is a soul entirely adhering to and acquiescing in
7:38
this revelation. See acquiescing.
7:41
In modern English, that word sometimes has a negative
7:43
connotation. Yeah, does.
7:45
Like giving up or surrendering to something you do not really
7:49
want to do. You know, I acquiesce to my
7:51
boss's demands. It sounds reluctant.
7:53
Edwards is using it differently, isn't he?
7:55
Very differently. He is using it in its classical
7:58
sense, which implies finding REST.
8:00
Finding rest. Yeah.
8:01
To acquiesce is to cease striving to rest satisfied in
8:05
something. When the soul acquiesces in
8:07
Christ, it stops trying to secure its own salvation, stops
8:10
looking for other remedies, and rests entirely on the
8:13
sufficiency of the Savior. It is a peaceful, willing,
8:16
yielding. Got it.
8:18
Now to breakdown the mechanics of this resting, Edwards
8:20
identifies 5 specific components of what he calls a finance or
8:25
trust. A finance, yeah.
8:26
I think it's worth walking through these because it shows
8:29
how comprehensive this act of the soul really is.
8:33
Absolutely. So the first component of trust
8:35
is consenting to the good being offered.
8:37
This relates back to your restaurant analogy.
8:39
Right, wanting the food. Yeah, you must view the
8:42
salvation offered in the gospel as a desirable, excellent thing.
8:46
If you do not want it, you cannot trust anyone to give it
8:49
to you. Makes total sense.
8:50
The second component is assenting to the reality and
8:53
sufficiency of the one offering it.
8:56
Which is the intellectual part. Yeah.
8:57
The intellectual component we discussed earlier, you have to
9:00
believe the rescuer actually actually exists and is capable
9:02
of performing the rescue. Then the third component is
9:05
applying the mind to him, which Edwards describes as seeking him
9:09
out. Seeking him out.
9:10
Right. Trust is not passive if you
9:13
believe a doctor has the cure for your disease.
9:16
Trust involves actually going to the doctor's office and
9:18
presenting yourself as a patient.
9:20
It's the heart seeking of salvation from this specific
9:23
source. OK, here is where I have a
9:24
logical question based on the text.
9:27
The 4th component of trust is hoping to obtain the good.
9:31
Now I always hear faith and hope listed as distinct virtues.
9:36
You know, faith, hope, and love. So how can we hope in a promise
9:40
before we've even proven our faith?
9:43
Doesn't the hope come after the faith is established?
9:46
You've hit on a nuance Edwards anticipated and spent
9:49
considerable time resolving. He asked the same question, How
9:53
can a person be encouraged to trust in Christ by a conditional
9:56
promise if the condition for receiving the promise is trust
10:00
itself? Yeah, it creates A logical loop.
10:02
A huge 1 like. I will save you if you trust me,
10:06
but I cannot trust that you will save me until I know I have met
10:09
the condition of trusting you. It literally makes my brain
10:12
hurt. It is a bit of a brain twister,
10:14
yeah, But Edwards resolves this by separating the essence of the
10:17
first act of faith from its immediate fruit.
10:20
He argues hope is not the essence of the very first act of
10:23
saving faith. It's not.
10:24
No, you do not initially trust Christ because He has promised
10:28
to save you specifically. Wait, really?
10:30
Why do you trust him then? You trust him because your eyes
10:32
are open to see His glorious sufficiency for sinners in
10:36
general. For sinners in general, OK.
10:38
Right. The soul, burdened by guilt,
10:40
sees Christ's mediation as beautiful.
10:43
His sacrifice is massive enough to cover any offense and the
10:46
nature of God's mercy is overflowing.
10:49
You see His absolute glorious sufficiency, and that's like
10:52
causes the soul to quit all other endeavors and apply to
10:56
Him. Oh, I see.
10:58
So the focus is entirely on the object, on Christ's capability
11:02
and goodness, not on a guarantee of my own personal safety at
11:05
first. That's right, the essence of the
11:07
ACT is choosing Him and closing with His way of salvation
11:10
because it is excellent, Edwards says.
11:12
Hope instantly follows that site.
11:14
Instantly follows. Yeah, it is the natural,
11:16
necessary, and next immediate fruit.
11:19
Once you see the congruity between God's declared mercy and
11:22
your own desperate need, and you feel your heart drawn to Him,
11:24
you can't help but hope you realize God wouldn't give you
11:27
such a desire for the Savior if He didn't intend to save you.
11:30
Wow. So hope does not come before the
11:32
trust. It is born out of the trust in
11:34
the very same moment. Exactly.
11:36
I mean spot on. It is like seeing a massive,
11:38
sturdy bridge spanning a Canyon. You don't step onto the bridge
11:43
because someone handed you a personalized certificate
11:45
guaranteeing the bridge will hold your specific weight.
11:48
Right, you'd never asked for. That you step onto it, you trust
11:51
it because you can clearly see the thick steel cables, the deep
11:54
concrete anchors and the sheer engineering excellence of the
11:58
structure. Your hope of getting to the
12:00
other side is the immediate result of seeing the bridges
12:03
sufficiency. Yeah.
12:04
You rest in the nature of the bridge.
12:07
That brings us to Edwards 5th component of trust adventuring
12:11
on this hope in practice. Adventuring.
12:14
I like that word. It means taking action that
12:16
costs something. True trust always results in
12:19
adventure. It involves omitting something
12:21
you would otherwise do, or doing something that brings trouble or
12:24
expense because you are resting on the truth of the promise.
12:27
It is putting your money where your mouth is.
12:29
If you trust the bridge, you actually walk across it, leaving
12:32
the safety of the Cliff edge behind.
12:34
Yeah, and this moves us seamlessly from abstract
12:37
theology into vivid practical imagery.
12:41
Having defined trust intellectually with these five
12:43
points, Edwards looks at how the writers of the Bible describe
12:47
this trust in practice. And he goes heavily into the
12:50
vocabulary of the Old Testament. Here he does, which is where the
12:53
material gets intensely visual. Edwards uses a specific analogy
12:57
of a besieged city to explain how trust operates in a crisis.
13:00
Right. Imagine a city surrounded by a
13:02
massive, ruthless enemy army. The walls are crumbling, the
13:06
food is running out and destruction is imminent.
13:09
The citizens are in total distress.
13:11
It's completely desperate situation.
13:13
Totally desperate. Then they hear a report of a
13:15
great champion, a king with an invincible army who is miles
13:18
away but has a reputation for immense power and goodness.
13:22
So the people of the city have a choice.
13:24
They can try to patch their own walls, or they can send a
13:26
messenger through enemy lines to ask this champion for relief.
13:30
And Edwards says, if they believe the reports of his
13:32
goodness and sufficiency, and if they are induced by those
13:35
reports to send to him for relief, they are trusting in
13:37
that champion. Even before he arrives.
13:39
Yes, they are risking their survival on his reputation.
13:43
They are committing their cause to him.
13:46
This perfectly illustrates the Old Testament vocabulary Edwards
13:49
highlights. He points out the Bible rarely
13:52
uses clinical, academic words for faith.
13:55
It uses phrases like flying for refuge.
13:58
Which implies motion. Urgent motion.
14:00
Yeah, like the ancient Israelite cities of refuge, where a person
14:04
accused of a crime had to physically run to the city gates
14:07
before the Avenger blood caught them, is an act of desperate
14:11
motion. He also highlights the phrase
14:13
taking hold of God's strength. It implies a person who is weak,
14:16
perhaps drowning or falling, gripping something solid and
14:19
immovable. Another frequent phrase is
14:21
leaning on the Lord, or sting ourselves on Him.
14:24
And if you are leaning your full weight on a pillar and that
14:26
pillar vanishes, you hit the floor.
14:29
Leaning requires a complete transfer of support.
14:31
It does, but the most evocative phrase Edwards pulls from the
14:35
Hebrew texts is rolling your burden or rolling your way upon
14:38
the Lord. Psalm 37 says commit thy way
14:41
into the Lord, trust also in him, Edwards notes.
14:44
In the original Hebrew, the word translated as commit literally
14:48
means to. Roll to roll.
14:50
I want to set up a modern equivalent to the Besieged City
14:53
to help us feel the weight of this rolling.
14:55
Let's do it. Imagine being stranded on a
14:58
sinking ship in the middle of the ocean.
15:01
The waters are freezing. You are clinging to a piece of
15:04
wreckage like a wooden door, trying to keep your head above
15:07
water. OK, very vivid.
15:09
Your hands are numb and you know you cannot hold on much longer.
15:13
Then you hear the sound of blades cutting the air.
15:16
A rescue helicopter hovers above you, and rescue swimmer lowers a
15:20
basket into the churning waves. The critical moment of decision
15:24
has arrived. Right, because to be saved, you
15:27
have to do something that feels incredibly unnatural.
15:29
You have to let go of the wreckage.
15:30
That wooden door is the only thing that has kept you alive so
15:33
far. It represents your own efforts,
15:36
your own strength. The rescue basket requires your
15:39
empty hands. Edwards mechanics come into full
15:41
view here. Letting go of the wreckage is
15:44
the physical manifestation of abandoning your own merit.
15:48
You have to realize your complete helplessness, abandoned
15:51
the debris and actively roll your entire survival, your
15:55
physical weight, into that basket.
15:57
You can't hedge your bets. No, you cannot keep one hand on
16:01
the sinking door and put one hand in the basket.
16:03
You must transfer your weight entirely.
16:06
You must acquiesce to the rescue mechanism provided by the
16:09
helicopter. Which presents a very personal
16:11
question for you, the listener. When you look at your own
16:14
spiritual posture, are you trying to patch the sinking ship
16:17
yourself? Are you clinging to your own
16:20
wooden door of good deeds, good intentions, or religious
16:23
knowledge? That's a hard question.
16:25
It is or have you realized the ship is going down?
16:27
Let go of the debris and rolled the burden of your soul entirely
16:31
onto the rescuer. Because the only thing that
16:33
stops someone from letting go of the wreckage and flying for
16:36
refuge is the false belief that they do not actually need a
16:39
refuge. Right, they think they're fine.
16:41
They think they're wooden door is a luxury yacht.
16:44
And this brings us to Edward's devastating critique of self
16:47
righteousness. Let's look into this.
16:50
Why is self righteousness the ultimate enemy of the trust we
16:53
just described? Well, Edwards defines trusting
16:56
in your own righteousness in a precise way.
16:58
He says it is expecting God's anger to abate or expecting to
17:02
gain God's favor due to some supposed excellence in yourself.
17:06
Supposed excellence. Yeah, it is the belief that when
17:10
God looks at you, he sees something so intrinsically good
17:14
or valuable, it becomes fitting and logical for him to accept
17:17
you based on your own merits. I imagine people here self
17:20
righteousness and picture a boastful Pharisee standing on
17:24
the street corner. Most people would totally deny
17:26
they think that way. Edwards is known for trapping
17:29
his readers though. How does he catch the person who
17:31
thinks they aren't boasting? Because Edwards is a master
17:33
psychologist, he breaks down the supposed excellence into various
17:37
forms to show how subtle it is. It's not just moral excellence
17:40
like boasting about giving to the poor or never breaking the
17:42
law, he points out. It can also be a negative
17:45
excellence. Negative excellence?
17:47
Haven't heard that term before. What is negative excellence?
17:49
It is the mindset that says, well, I might not be a St., but
17:53
at least I'm not as bad as that person over there.
17:55
Oh wow, yeah. It is building a righteousness
17:59
out of the sins you haven't committed.
18:01
You compare yourself to a murderer or a thief, and you
18:04
conclude your lack of extreme wickedness constitutes an
18:08
excellence God must respect. We grade on a curve.
18:12
We assume God is a professor who will pass the top 70% of the
18:15
class, so we just make sure we aren't in the bottom 30.
18:18
That's it exactly. I mean, that's precisely how we
18:21
think. Edwards even argues people can
18:23
turn their own relibious duties into self righteousness.
18:26
How so? He says if you expect God to
18:29
convert you or save you because you are seeking Him so
18:32
diligently or because your prayers are so earnest, you are
18:35
trusting in your own excellence. You are treating your act of
18:38
seeking as a currency to purchase grace.
18:40
Oh, that is a harsh diagnostic light.
18:42
It implies the only way to genuinely fly for refuge is to
18:46
experience means the complete annihilation of self
18:49
righteousness. Complete annihilation.
18:51
And Edward says the mechanism for this annihilation is a
18:54
guilty conscience. Right.
18:56
And we usually think of a guilty conscience as a purely negative
18:59
thing, right? Something to be suppressed or
19:01
distracted from. But in Edwards framework, a
19:04
properly functioning guilty conscience is an absolute
19:07
necessity for saving faith, he explains.
19:11
A guilty conscience is the soul's natural sense of the
19:14
connection between sin and punishment.
19:16
It is the innate understanding that, according to the reason
19:19
and nature of things and the requirements of divine
19:21
government, crimes must be punished.
19:24
It is the internal judge that agrees with the law.
19:27
When a man commits a crime, even if he avoids the police, his
19:30
soul has a natural sense of the propriety of punishment.
19:34
Edwards points out all nations throughout history have a sense
19:37
of the propriety of punishing men for crimes.
19:40
It is woven into the fabric of human reason.
19:42
As long as the mind is under the weight of this guilt, it feels
19:45
bound to punishment. But how does true faith interact
19:49
with this guilty conscience? Yeah, obviously the goal isn't
19:51
to just stay guilty forever. No, not at all.
19:54
True faith prepares the way for the removal of guilt by giving
19:57
the mind a new sight. The believer looks at the
20:00
mediation of Jesus Christ, his perfect life, his sacrificial
20:04
death. And suddenly sees the fitness
20:06
and congruity of this method of salvation.
20:09
The fitness meaning it makes logical and moral sense.
20:13
Yeah, the mind sees the law is perfectly answered and satisfied
20:17
by Christ. The punishment wasn't ignored,
20:20
it was absorbed. Absorbed, therefore, it appears
20:23
proper, dutiful, and entirely according to the reason of
20:26
things, that the Sinner should not be punished, but accepted.
20:30
The mind sees away. God can be perfectly just and
20:33
perfectly merciful at the same time.
20:35
There is nothing in the law or in the divine nature to hinder
20:38
this pardon. And Edwards makes a crucial
20:40
point here, which is that you cannot see the beauty of the
20:43
cure if you deny the severity of the disease.
20:46
Right, he writes. It is impossible for any
20:48
congruity to be seen without comparing the satisfaction with
20:51
the guilt. You have to hold them up next to
20:53
each other. You must have a proper sense of
20:55
the desert of wrath in order to appreciate the magnitude of the
20:57
atonement. That makes sense.
20:59
If you think your sins are just minor mistakes, the brutal death
21:02
of the Son of God will seem like a massive, unnecessary
21:04
overreaction. It will not look beautiful.
21:06
It will look absurd. So when a person who is crushed
21:10
by a true guilty conscience suddenly sees the sufficiency of
21:14
Christ, what happens in their mind?
21:17
The burden lifts. Edwards describes A weighty ease
21:20
of mind. The soul realizes God has no
21:23
disposition and no need to punish the Sinner anymore
21:26
because the majesty, honor, and authority of God have been
21:29
entirely vindicated by Jesus. The debt is paid.
21:33
The Ledger is clear. And the relief does not come
21:35
from looking inward and finding a hidden reserve of goodness.
21:38
It comes from looking outward and seeing an objective
21:41
historical transaction that satisfied the demands of
21:44
justice. Completely outward.
21:46
Yeah, going back to our analogy, the sinking sailor doesn't find
21:48
relief by discovering he can tread water a little longer.
21:51
He finds relief when he's sitting on the floor of the
21:53
helicopter. The safety is entirely external.
21:56
And that external focus guarantees all the glory goes to
21:59
the Savior, not the saved, Edwards notes.
22:02
Any other sort of faith robs Christ of his honor.
22:05
The more the Sinner has a soul explicit dependence upon Christ,
22:09
the more Christ has the glory of his own salvation.
22:12
OK, so having established what's saving faith is this active,
22:16
relishing external trust that abandoned self righteousness, we
22:20
face a structural argument Edwards makes.
22:23
We're looking at his July 1750 sermon on 1st John 5.
22:27
Now his goal in this sermon is to distinguish saving faith
22:30
clearly from the common faith unregenerate people might
22:34
possess. Right.
22:35
And in the sermon, Edwards argues forcefully, the
22:37
difference between saving faith and common faith is the
22:39
difference in nature and kind, not just in degree.
22:42
This is a critical philosophical and theological distinction.
22:45
I think we need to break down the difference between a
22:47
difference in degree versus a difference in kind.
22:49
OK, so a difference in degree means two things are made of the
22:52
exact same substance, but one simply has more of it than the
22:55
other. Like a puddle and an ocean
22:57
differ in degree, they are both made of liquid water.
23:00
A difference in kind means the two things are fundamentally
23:02
different substances. A puddle of water and a block of
23:06
solid iron differ in kind. Got it.
23:09
And Edwards takes on the opponents who argue saving faith
23:12
is just a really strong, intense version of common intellectual
23:16
faith. They argue it is just a
23:18
difference in degree. To dismantle this, Edwards uses
23:22
a fascinating mathematical refutation.
23:24
He uses masterful logic here. He says, let us suppose for a
23:27
moment the difference is only in the degree of ascent.
23:30
Let us assign a number to it. Suppose 1000° of intellectual
23:34
ascent are required for salvation.
23:37
Anything less than 1000 is common faith.
23:39
Hit 1000 and you have saving faith.
23:40
I am following the math. Edwards then points out
23:43
unregenerate natural men are capable of achieving very high
23:46
degrees of intellectual ascent. They can study the evidence,
23:49
read the history and become highly convinced.
23:51
Suppose a natural man, through his own study, raises his ascent
23:55
to 999°. He is just one degree short.
23:58
He is incredibly close. He believes it almost perfectly.
24:01
But here is the absurdity Edwards exposes.
24:04
The Bible teaches saving faith is a supernatural gift of God, a
24:08
result of being born again. If the 1000° theory is true, it
24:12
means a natural man can get 999° of the way there on his own
24:16
natural ability, but he needs a supernatural divine miracle just
24:20
to get that final single one thousandth degree.
24:24
That makes no sense. Why would God need to perform a
24:26
regenerating miracle, the Holy Spirit, just to push someone
24:29
over a tiny, imperceptible finish line when the person did
24:33
99.9 percent of the work naturally?
24:35
Exactly. Edwards argues it is highly
24:38
unreasonable to think God uses such massive supernatural
24:41
language, like being raised from the dead or being created anew,
24:43
to describe a change that is infinitely small and simply an
24:46
increase in quantity. It's totally out of proportion.
24:49
Yeah. Furthermore, how could anyone
24:50
ever know they were saved? The difference between 999 and
24:54
1000 is practically indiscernible to the human mind.
24:57
It would make assurance of salvation impossible.
24:59
I was thinking about an analogy to visualize this.
25:02
Think about heating water on a stove.
25:04
You put a pot of cold water on the burner that is 50°.
25:08
You turn up the heat, it gets to 150°, then 200°.
25:11
The water is getting hotter and hotter.
25:13
This is common faith increasing in degree.
25:16
Now at 212°F, the water boils and turns into steam.
25:20
Yeah, but the water analogy actually illustrates the problem
25:23
with the opposing view. Water turning to steam is a
25:26
phase change, yes, but it is still the same chemical
25:30
compound, H2O. It is a natural process caused
25:34
by applying more of the same natural heat.
25:36
Edwards is arguing saving faith is not a natural process at all.
25:40
It is not like heating water to 212°.
25:43
It is a completely different substance.
25:44
Right. And Edwards brings in his own
25:46
scriptural illustration to make this point.
25:48
He quotes the apostle Peter, who compares the trial of faith to
25:52
gold tested by fire. Right first Peter 1.7 that the
25:55
trial of your faith being much more precious than of gold that
25:58
perishes though be tried with fire.
26:00
Edwards asks when a metallurgist puts a substance in a furnace to
26:04
test it, what is he testing? He is not testing the quantity
26:08
of the substance. He is testing the nature of the
26:10
metal. The fire reveals whether the
26:13
substance is true gold or iron pyrite.
26:16
You know, fool's. Gold The fire strips away the
26:18
impurities and proves the substance is what it claims to
26:21
be. If the.
26:21
Substance in the Crucible is iron.
26:23
Having a million tons of it will not turn it into gold.
26:27
You can increase the quantity infinitely, but the nature of
26:30
the metal remains iron. A million degrees of common
26:33
intellectual ascent will never equal 1 degree of saving
26:37
spiritual faith. They are different metals.
26:39
Because common faith is a natural product of the human
26:41
intellect, saving faith is a supernatural gift, an entirely
26:45
new principle implanted in the soul by the Spirit of God.
26:48
It has a different origin, a different nature, and it
26:51
produces entirely different effects.
26:53
To hammer home this distinction in nature, Edwards tackles a
26:55
specific counter argument. A skeptic might say, well, maybe
26:59
the faith is exactly the same in both the saved and unsaved
27:02
person. Maybe it is the same substance,
27:04
but in the saved person it simply happens to produce
27:08
different external effects, like good works and a holy life.
27:12
And Edwards treats this argument as a violation of all human
27:14
reason. It is a strict law of logic that
27:17
different effects cannot come from the exact same cause under
27:20
the same circumstances without some internal difference in the
27:24
cause itself. If you have two identical
27:26
causes, you should get 2 identical effects.
27:28
If the effects are wildly different, the causes cannot be
27:31
identical. Right.
27:32
To claim otherwise is to say the diversity in the effect arises
27:35
from nothing. If the faith is identical, but
27:38
one produces obedience and the other produces rebellion, where
27:42
did the obedience come from? It has no 'cause it is magic.
27:45
And to illustrate this, Edwards uses Christ's analogy of the
27:48
tree and the fruit. Jesus said a tree is known by
27:51
its fruit. If you are walking through an
27:53
orchard and you see one tree producing sweet healthy apples
27:57
and another tree producing poisonous rotten berries, you do
28:01
not conclude they are the exact same species of tree that just
28:04
happen to be acting differently by sheer chance.
28:07
No, you conclude, the internal biological nature of the trees
28:11
is fundamentally different. An apple tree produces apples
28:15
because it possesses the nature of an apple tree.
28:17
The difference in the visible fruit proves a difference in the
28:20
invisible SAP and root system. And Edwards takes this a step
28:23
further with another analogy from the book of James,
28:26
comparing a living body to a dead body.
28:29
James writes. For as the body without the
28:31
Spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
28:34
Let's visualize that you have two human bodies lying side by
28:38
side. Externally they might have the
28:40
same physical structure, the same limbs, same organs, but one
28:43
is moving, breathing, speaking and working.
28:46
The other is completely still cold and unresponsive.
28:49
When you observe that massive difference in external effects,
28:52
you do not assume the two bodies are internally identical.
28:56
You conclude 1 possesses an invisible animating life force,
28:59
a living spirit, and the other does not.
29:01
The cause of the motion is the invisible spirit.
29:04
So the dead body is common faith.
29:07
It has the structure of truth that might be able to articulate
29:10
doctrines. Florida State, but it has no
29:12
breath, no spiritual motion. The living body is saving faith.
29:16
It is animated by the Spirit of God and therefore it inevitably
29:20
produces the motions of a holy life.
29:22
This logic completely dismantles the idea that faith is just an
29:25
inert intellectual agreement. If your faith does not produce
29:28
works, it is not because you're saving.
29:29
Faith is just having a lazy day. It is because you possess A
29:32
corpse. The nature of the faith is dead.
29:35
Which requires a serious self audit for the listener.
29:39
Think about your own belief system.
29:40
Is your belief an inert fact sitting in your brain like a
29:44
dead body in a morgue? You acknowledge it is there, but
29:47
it does nothing? Or is your belief an active
29:50
operative mechanism that produces visible motion?
29:54
Does it change how you spend your money, how you treat your
29:56
enemies, how you endure suffering?
29:58
Because if the tree is not producing apples, we have to
30:00
seriously question the nature of the root.
30:02
And this active, living nature of faith inevitably leads us to
30:06
the relationship between faith, repentance, and obedience.
30:09
If saving faith is a living thing that produces holy motion,
30:12
how does it relate to the authority of Christ?
30:15
This presents a massive theological tension, Edwards
30:18
asserts. You cannot separate accepting
30:20
Christ as priest from accepting Christ as king.
30:22
Let's define those terms first. OK, so in classical theology,
30:26
Christ office as priest involves his role as a mediator who
30:30
offers a sacrifice for sin to secure pardon and forgiveness.
30:34
He is the one who steps between a holy God and sinful humanity
30:37
to absorb the penalty. Christ's Office's King, on the
30:41
other hand, involves His sovereign authority to rule, to
30:44
command obedience, and to establish laws.
30:47
Now most people are very happy to accept the priest.
30:50
We all want the pardon. We want to get out of jail free
30:52
card, but accepting the king is a different story because the
30:55
king demands submission. Right.
30:58
And Edwards argues attempting to split these offices is a fatal
31:01
error. He says the very act of
31:03
accepting the pardon inherently contains a submission to the
31:06
king. They are a package deal.
31:08
How does he prove that logically?
31:09
Like how does accepting a free gift requires submission?
31:12
Well, he traces the logic of what a pardon actually is.
31:15
To accept the party of Christ the priest means you fully
31:17
approve of God's method of salvation.
31:19
You agree with the mechanism of the cross.
31:21
You're rolling your burden onto it.
31:23
Yes. Now what does the cross
31:25
represent? The cross represents God's
31:28
infinite hatred of sin. Christ suffered and died because
31:31
sin is so detestable to God that it required a massive infinite
31:35
punishment to approve of Christ's suffering.
31:38
For your sin implies you agree with God about the severity of
31:41
your sin. You are saying yes, my sin is
31:44
infinitely detestable and it deserves wrath.
31:47
Oh, I see. If you truly believe your sin is
31:49
detestable, you cannot simultaneously desire to
31:52
continue living in it. Therefore, the very act of
31:54
believing and accepting the atonement inherently contains a
31:57
hatred of sin and a desire for holiness.
32:01
If you do not hate your sin, you do not actually agree with the
32:03
cross, and if you do not agree with the cross, you have not
32:05
accepted the priest. So by agreeing with the priest
32:08
sacrifice, you are automatically agreeing with the King's laws
32:11
against sin. You are submitting to his rule.
32:14
Edwards says it is an acceptance of God's holy mercy.
32:17
It is not grace exercise to the prejudice of God's holiness, but
32:20
grace that manifests God's strict justice.
32:22
The heart of a true believer fully approves of the law itself
32:25
as worthy of being obeyed. OK, I have to push back here
32:28
because I struggle with that idea.
32:29
Sure, if faith inherently requires a hatred of sin, and if
32:33
it requires A disposition to sell all and suffer all in duty
32:37
to Christ the King, aren't we sneaking works into salvation?
32:41
Aren't we saying you have to clean up your life and obey the
32:43
King in order to be saved? That sounds like earning
32:46
salvation. I get that, but this is the
32:48
genius of Edwards theological synthesis, right?
32:51
He maintains the absolute freedom of grace while securing
32:55
the absolute necessity of holiness.
32:57
He clarifies it is the disposition or willingness to
33:00
obey that is the condition of the heart making the union real.
33:04
It is not the works themselves that earn the salvation.
33:07
So the works don't buy the ticket, but the disposition
33:10
proves you are on the train. Let's use Edward's own
33:12
terminology. He says the heart's entire
33:14
approbation of Christ's obedience secures universal
33:17
obedience to the law of God, not as a lot of terror, but as a law
33:20
of liberty. The obedience flows from a free
33:23
and ingenuous spirit. It is the obedience of children,
33:26
not of slaves. Because a slave obeys the master
33:30
out of sheer terror of the whip. The slave hates the master and
33:34
hates the law, but complies to avoid pain.
33:37
If the whip is removed, the slave rebels.
33:40
A child, on the other hand, obeys the father out of love,
33:43
reverence and a shared nature. The child approves of the
33:47
Father's goodness. When the soul acquiesces in
33:49
Christ, it receives a new nature, the fear of punishment.
33:53
The whip of the law is removed because the priest is paid the
33:55
penalty. But instead of rebelling, the
33:58
soul now obeys the king because it loves His Holiness.
34:01
The faith that justifies the Sinner simultaneously destroys
34:04
the love of sin. You are saved by faith alone,
34:06
but the faith that saves is never alone.
34:09
It comes with a new disposition that naturally yields fruit.
34:12
Yeah, someone claims to trust the priest for forgiveness, but
34:14
lives an open, unrepentant rebellion against the king.
34:17
Edwards would say their faith is a fiction.
34:20
They have not experienced that spiritual taste in relish.
34:23
They are a dead body claiming to be alive.
34:25
Well, we have covered massive ground today.
34:27
We started by tearing down the false assurance of intellectual
34:30
ascent. True faith is not just nodding
34:33
your head at historical facts. Even demons can ace that
34:37
theology test. True faith is a supernatural
34:39
gift that imparts a spiritual relish for the gospel.
34:44
It is not just reviewing the restaurant, it is tasting the
34:46
food and finding it excellent. And we saw how that relish leads
34:49
to a complete acquiescence. It is a ceasing of self effort.
34:53
It is the besieged city sending for the champion.
34:56
It is the drowning sailor letting go of the wooden door
34:59
and rolling his entire weight into the rescue basket.
35:02
It requires the complete annihilation of self
35:04
righteousness brought about by a properly functioning guilty
35:07
conscience that sees the absolute fitness and beauty of
35:10
Christ's mediation. We learned this faith is not
35:12
just a higher degree of common intellectual belief.
35:15
It is a completely different substance like gold compared to
35:18
iron tested in the fire. Because it is a living,
35:21
supernatural substance, it inevitably produces the fruit of
35:25
a holy life. It embraces Christ not only as
35:29
the priest who pardons, but as the king who rules, resulting in
35:32
the joyful, free obedience of a child rather than the terrified
35:36
compliance of a slave. I want to look at one final
35:39
striking hrase from Jonathan Edward's notes.
35:42
He defines faith as the whole soul, active, agreeing,
35:46
according, and symthonizing with this truth.
35:49
Symphonizing. I love that word.
35:51
It implies harmony, resonance and beautiful integration.
35:54
It does. It implies every faculty of the
35:56
soul, the intellect, the will, the affections, the desires, are
35:59
all tuned to the same pitch and playing the same chord in
36:02
response to the glory of God. That idea of symphonizing brings
36:05
up a new, fascinating implication I want to leave you
36:07
with to Mull over. If saving faith is truly a
36:10
sympathizing of the soul with God's nature, then how does this
36:13
change the way we view suffering or dark seasons in our lives?
36:17
Often when tragedy strikes, we think our faith is failing or we
36:20
think God has abandoned us because our intellectual ascent
36:23
gets cloudy. We can't make sense of the math,
36:27
but if faith is about the soul being tuned to a specific chord,
36:30
perhaps those fiery trials Peter talked about aren't destroying
36:34
the instrument. Perhaps they are aggressively
36:36
tuning the strings. Tuning the strings.
36:38
Yeah, even when you cannot see the music sheet, the master
36:41
musician is tightening the pegs so your life resonates with a
36:44
pure pitch of trust. The next time you find yourself
36:47
in the dark, ask yourself, is my intellect demanding an
36:50
explanation, or as my soul symphonizing with the unseen
36:54
conductor? The music of a symphonizing soul
36:57
is unmistakable, even in the dark.
36:59
Thank you for joining us on this deep dive.
37:01
We will catch you next time on Reformed Thinking.